The exultation of a handful of intellectuals for the 'NO' extradition from Brazil Battisti was a matter of hours if not minutes, and arrived on time. As mentioned in a previous post the list of defendants is long and - since it is also well known that people do not need more publicity - who wants to can find it themselves alone on the Internet (a call for Baptists was in 2004 subscribed to by many Italian and French).
The question deserves a break to study for the variety of legal arguments, political and moral questions raised. But, above all, question the responsibility of all those who care about building a respectful public reason of the facts and rights.
1. The first set of questions is purely judicial. Some intellectuals are Italian and French - represented by the figure of Fred Vargas, Archaeozoology and mystery writer, author of a pamphlet which shows the innocence of the accused - are convinced that one of Baptists is the case of a man unjustly persecuted . Certainly, the legal proceedings, particularly in terrorist cases are far from simple and peaceful and no one can even exclude errors by prosecutors. However, the judicial history of Baptists said that more than seventy courts have dealt with the case in the course of nine trials (the first started in 1981, the last was completed in 1993) who considered responsible Battisti a high number of robberies, illegal possession of arms and four murders. The imprisonment has never been granted. On the judicial side is
contest at least three points: the emergency legislation against terrorism, the use of repentance, the trial in absentia. The theme of the emergency legislation is important: it is highly questionable that, in certain situations, however complex, the tools of the normal law can be compounded with the consequent risks for the guarantees of the accused. At the same time, specialized laws exist and have been applied, for example, on fighting the Mafia.
Some intellectuals - especially in France - accusing the Italian government had suspended democracy for using the unrepentant terrorism. On the other hand, the use of collaborators of justice in the fight against the Mafia has proved a successful method that many laws - including the French - have copied. Why, then, there is no Dreyfus case among the godfathers of Cosa Nostra? Nor can we say that the special legislation has been made to measure for the citizen Cesare Battisti. However, these are rules that cover those crimes, anyone who has committed, and therefore retain their essential requirements of generality and abstraction.
On conviction in absentia, finally, there is little object. In the process should ensure the defense of the accused, but not its impunity simply because he did not appear in court. Do not be put on trial the defense would obviously be ideal, but the legal solutions are not so comfortable. Of course, if procedural irregularities or violations of laws protecting the rights of defense of the accused, there were - as some accuse - are detected and punished. But honestly it is hard to imagine that this happened in all nine processes that have been celebrated.
remains a matter of political fund very unpleasant use of the judiciary who are all obviously happy when it comes to defending themselves.
2. There is a second area of \u200b\u200bissues - in fact very different - that are of political nature.
The first - embodied, for example, by the French philosopher Bernard Henry Levy - does not intervene in the guilt of Baptists, but only proposes a broad interpretation of the doctrine Mitterrand, which expands the right of asylum to all former terrorists. The starting point of course is very noble, even uncomfortable attitudes of type 'Voltairean', is based on the defense of freedom of expression and political activism. The issue is very complex, but in essence, remains a prisoner of conceptual issues resolved. Meanwhile, it is never called into account the protection of victims of these acts of 'political': the victims, in front, for example, freedom 'politics' to shoot, they lose all relevance, both in terms of human law. And because it fulfills a gelatine of reasons in which it becomes impossible to discern: as affected by the 'color' policy of terror? As the situation changes if the bomb was detonated in a country ruled by a bloody dictatorship and / or a type of liberal democracy? The Enlightenment of the premises, in short, is likely to tip over into its opposite: the risk, among others, ethicised state is inevitable, as is inevitable that political manipulation of reality.
Many French intellectuals - an example is that of the writer and essayist Philippe Sollers - have essentially endorsed two ideas of a typical Italian cultural cliches (Toni Negri, Oreste Scalzone, a former Red Brigades) and a bit 'are held together . The first is the idea that in Italy in the seventies there was a civil war. The second is that in Italy there was a de facto fascist regime and the consequences of violence were justified. Battisti course forms part of a long line of victims of this civil war and / or this fascist state. The argument is finely chopped. Used for decades to endorse the violence (in place) of the proletariat. Even attractive because it turns rambling and mean revolutionary heroes cursed, champions of freedom, political persecution. Probably this is like the novelists. But with all the romance, the good will and imagination narrative possible, just does not hold. Just line up the lists of persons killed and shot in the legs and listen to the reasons and statements of the Italian Red Brigades, to understand the disasters that could produce the ideological blindness.
Linked to this is the ultimate political argument. If this is true (the civil war, social unrest, the arrogance fascist, etc.). The so-called generation of losers, those who have taken up arms, have no liability for acts committed their crimes but are not political events that are part of the effort of those years. Need, in short, the 'political solution' which, of course, results in an amnesty. And, above all, is resolved in the usual contempt for law and for the rights.
few years ago, John Moro and suggested the only serious solution acceptable realize that even in Italy Reconciliation Commission in South Africa ended in some ways the story of the crimes of apartheid bartering justice with truth. The problem is that in Italy and France lack the basic conditions - first of all cultural - For the victory of transparency and accountability on partisanship. Even today, those intellectuals and activists who should tell the inconvenient truth continue to pursue the path of ideological obsession and manipulation.
Not everyone, however: Roberto Saviano, who also signed the appeal in 2004 for Baptists then asked to be excused and this ability to recognize the errors must be acknowledged. We like to think that at least he had understood that the latest violence against the victims is just one of the executioners in turn persecuted.
0 comments:
Post a Comment